mr. bergdahl's parent. i would like to ask if any of the people who served honorably and were killed in action were given the courtesy of a rose garden ceremony at the white house. the answer to that is probably no. either what the president did benefited the security of the united states or it did not. i believe it did not. this is something that the american people disagree with. many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are looking to run interference for the administration i blaming previous presidents. that does not cut it on this issue. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. >> idb sympathy to you and your family and to your wife behind you. there are not any words to express the terrible sense of loss you must experience. i have had friends who have had similar losses. my heart goes out to you. thank you for being here today. we are here to examine the decision to exchange sergeant bergdahl, a soldier held in captivity for five years, 45 prisoners in guantÁnamo. it is easy to

mr. bergdahl 's parent. ask if any ofo the people who served honorably and were killed in action were given the courtesy of a rose garden ceremony at the white house. the answer to that is probably no. either what the president did benefited the security of the united states or it did not. i believe it did not. this is something that the american people disagree with. many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are looking to run interference for the administration i blaming previous presidents. that does not cut it on this issue. thehe chair recognizes gentleman from virginia. >> idb sympathy to you and your family and to your wife behind you. there are not any words to express the terrible sense of loss you must experience. i have had friends who have had similar losses. my heart goes out to you. thank you for being here today. we are here to examine the decision to exchange sergeant a soldier held in captivity for five years, 45 prisoners in guantÁnamo. it is easy to yield to the quotation to dec

mr. bergdahl, than just giving up these five leaders of the taliban. we could have, for example seen no evidence. mr. jacobsen, have you seen any evidence that there was pressure put on pakistan in order to get the taliban to return this prisoner? >> congressman rohrabacher, i'm not aware of the specifics of those negotiations. >> so you're unaware and i'm unaware. i've been looking, there's no indication here that this administration didn't even put pressure on the major supporter, the i.s.i. in pakistan to do what they could do. instead they gave up five murderous leaders. we know that one of them was perhaps engaged in the strategizing for 9/11 that result indeed 3,000 americans being slaughters in front of our face. he's being let go. then there's there's mullah muhammad fassel. i knew about this man, i you about him a long time ago. he was in fact captured. this you might say this was the second time he was released, because he was captured early on in 2001 after 9/11. he was put into a french fort with hundreds of other taliban leaders, and taliba

i, along with others, was asked to meet with the bergdahls, mr. and mrs. hl and had a chance to meet them and i was very impressed by their commitment to their son, their love for their son and their efforts to try and get him freed. as part of that, we have a set of standard talking points for things that included a statement that we were doing all we could to release him and from my own personal integrity, i wanted to make sure that that was a statement that i could say with certainty. so i, along with a number of colleagues, looked into the history of the previous five years and, as a result, i told my superiors that i could not make that statement. that i did not think that we could really say we had done all we could. we had done a lot and many people had dedicated themselves during that period of time. so it wasn't that we didn't do anything but we didn't do all we could and we often didn't do all we could because there were competing strategic, you mentioned osama bin laden and the effort to find a peace deal with the taliban. all of those issues got

mrs. bergdahl don't intend to make any travel plans public. they ask for continued privacy as they concentrate on their son's reintegration. and with that, we'll go to the next question. >> hi. this is a little bit of a repeat and i wasn't sure whether it's colonel poppen that should address this but can you specifically address his condition now physically and then also his condition mentally and then i have one other question related to that. the -- if you could talk a little bit about whether he has expressed whether he plans or wants to return to duty. >> as far as his medical condition, we received him from the phase 2 integration team earlier this morning. overall, we're pleased with his physical state. he was able to ambulate and walk into the hospital and seemed to do so in a functional manner. we allowed him to get settled in to the hospital and into his room and his environment. and we're going to be planning more comprehensive testing and consultation, stuff that was not done during phase 2. >> regarding his mental state, from the p

mr. bergdahl, he will come home. any time we get an american soldier back to our country we should all celebrate but before we hang judgment on him, wrong or right, we need to let the military go through what they're going to go through to decide the fate of that young man. the issues i wanted to ask you about, do we negotiate with terrorists or not, and specialist fuld, you brought up it's not even a nation. it's a terrorist group. again, this goes against our precedents and historical policy. you think this is a wise thing that we do or implement? >> congressman, i certainly think that it's a wise thing that we retrieved sergeant bergdahl. >> there is no doubt about that. but negotiating -- negotiating with terrorists? >> i want to run through a list of a couple of situation -- situations where we have negotiated not only with terrorists but with insurgent groups and state- -- sfate sponsors of terrorism. as i mentioned, part of bring the war to a conclusion will be continued discussions with the taliban. but takin

mr. bergdahl was taken in combat. that's not right. he was captured after he walked away. >> you heard susan rice. >> i heard that too. she should -- >> we go in to get him but there is this guy who served several tours in afghanistan, i believe, down in mexico and we're not going after him, not to help him? >> this is a guy whrofs in the wrong lane -- who was in the wrong lane and wound up in mexico by accident. by the way, one of mr. bergdahl's platoon mates says because he willingly deserted, he now should be court-martialed. >> meanwhile nine minutes after the top of the hour. heather nauert is poeufd to give us more. -- is poised to give us more. >> we've been telling you about this nationwide manhunt. that coming to an end. we have new video coming to "fox & friends" showing the dramatic moment a wanted fugitive is captured after three days on the run. take a look at this. >> put your hands -- >> 1025gracie field center. >> -- is in custody at this time. notify the f.b.i. >> police arrested ryan chamberlain under the golden gate

mrs. bergdahl do not intend to make any travel plans public. as they ask for continued privacy, questions remain about bergdahl's condition, the circumstances of his capture and the full impact of the trade that led to his rescue. military officials in san antonio are holding that news conference. let's listen in. >> today we are going to address your questions on the reintegration of sergeant bowe bergdahl who is now here at fort sam houston. our panel today includes the reintegration mission commander and commander of the u.s. army south, major general joseph p.disalvo. also colonel bradley poppin, psychologist from the joint personnel recovery agency and from brook army medical center, dr. colonel reynold wolf. the scope of today's press conference is on reintegration activities here. questions about sergeant bergdahl's activities before and after reintegration will be addressed by the department of the army and the department of defense. major general disalvo will make a brief opening statement, then we will go to q & a for approximately 30

mr. bergdahl.with regards to your w. about we congress wasn't consulted's it eppsly simple. dianne feinstein ha h. written to the white house and defense department and said absolutely not, unequivocally would she support tradiqoç irt terrorists for mr. bergdahl. they already knew what the answer would be when asking permission is which is required by they those instead of get the answer they didn't want they would violate the law. >> if you are are right on all of these, first of all the president has incredit i can incredit -- indeed i can be dibbably -- if he then is now characterizing this as a phony scandal and even though he may have enrange raged some in his own party. the rest of the nation sells like a number of republicans by may be complain complaining. there is nothing to done or whatever. >> it's been unprecedented that we have a president with such disregard for the legislative branch which is a quo equal body of our government. certain isly a guy who was a former constitutional law p

>> sure, i was -- i along with others was asked to meet with the bergdahls, mr. and mrs. nd had a chance to meet them and i was very impressed by their commitment to their son, their love for their son and their efforts to try to get him freed. as part of that we had a set of standard talking points that included a statement that we were doing all we could to release him. and from my own personal integrity, i wanted to make sure that was a statement that i could say with certainty. so i along with a number of colleagues looked into the history of the previous five years and as a result i told my superiors that i could not make that statement. that i could not really say i thought we had done all we could. these people had dedicated themselves during that period of time. so it was not that we didn't do anything. but we did all we could because there were competing strategies. you mentioned osama bin laden and the relationship with pakistan and the efforts to try to find some kind of peace deal with pakistan. all of those rested with sergeant bergdahl's fate. so he had been

mr. bergdahl. it is not up to congress in advance to decide somebody's status before we justify leverilever i -- leaving no one behind. this one time, let us resist the temptation of partisanship. thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair recognizes mr. meadows. >> i recently returned from guantanamo. got look in the eyes of many of the detaine res that are there. make no mistake, the ones we release in no comparison to the 400 or 500 that have been released prior. these men were a danger to the once that guarded them. so dangerous we cannot identify those who do guard them for their own protection. they are not choir boys. i will assure you they're singing a song. it's a death march for the men and women who come in their way in the future. the cost was way too high to release the taliban five in exchange for this. with this. with that, i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. weber, for one minute. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my colleague

mr. bergdahl's beard is not a tribute. it offended me and every soldier, i'm sure and our service members because obama during the va scandal he didn't host the survivors of people that died in the va system waiting for care and if he had wanted to really honor our troops, instead of having mr. and mrs. bergdahl, the father and mother of an alleged deserter and giving them more attention than he has any family he should have had the families of the six soldiers that died in searching and trying to free bowe bergdahl. the president disdains our troops. he uses them as political troops and then does something like this. oh, by the way, what's the price of getting private bergdahl back? release five of the most dangerous terrorists in the world. >> we're going to talk more about these troops. the president, you know, to say he disdains the troops, ralph, is so controversial, but what he did here is also very controversial. more with you in a minute. also coming up on thursday, in a kelly file exclusive, six members of sergean

mr. bergdahl's health was. >> right. and was he at risk. there's so many unanswered questions.ornia said he didn't look malnourished. >> we need a benghazi-style select committee investigation of this whole release. >> how often are we going to ask for a select committee? wait. i do want to get this in there because i believe you brought this up. secretary of state kerry said it's baloney that it make it more risky for our people abroad. >> the guy that wiped that village out, they have gone to that village, the journal did in the last week, and the people who have returned to it are now deathly afraid this bastard is coming back to do it again and we're let thag guy out. it's unheard of. >> excuse me. i want to go back to something. you guys mentioned it and i think it had a meaning, why does it matter what the president dresses like? >> i don't really care. i think the president ought to know he's going to do something, this is a big deal, you know, you are -- jimmy carter, you really should wear your ties if you are president. >> people on twitter are commenting. they are sa

mr. bergdahl said, wee don't care, we're -- the president's actions install that. >> some who have been released from guantanemo in the past have returned to the battlefield. is that a problem for the obama administration? sort of a slow burning fuse that a year from now, two years from now, five years from now, one of these five could do something pretty bad? >> according to the agreement, they're in cutter, and they need to be there for a year. but there's concern, the people in the taliban, that they will start getting involved in propaganda efforts right away, and perhaps contribute to operational efforts. so absolutely, there's a concern. and it's true, taliban is an ideological members, that wouldn't have the interest in going back and join the fight. these are the types that would enjoy the peace process, but i think unfortunately, these five detainees represent the worst of the worst. and i do fear that they will try to join in the fight after the next year when they're allowed to leave cu cutter. >> maybe you read some of the early stories, and found out they're a middle man and what's

mrs. bergdahl updated on this. do you think this is unusual? of this war and it seems to be an example of compassion and sympathy for his family they were kept up to date. now if they were improperly given access to classified information that would be one thing. my thing is good for the administration and good for them. >> i want to pull up the tweet from bowe bergdahl's dad but another question that is raised in this is how much influence the bergdahl's had in this process and whether they had a say that this was a good idea to trade the detainees. and this was a status from him. i am working to free the guantanamo bay prisoners. that was deleted. do you think there is anything towards that? >> you would have to establish that the bergdahl's were using these opportunities to be kept up to date on the efforts to gain their son's release and to lobby the military to make what people think is a badly unbalanced deal for his release. until that evidence shows up this is speculation. and the tweet, which was deleted, he is not stating -- mr. bergd

mr. bergdahl's parents. i'm going to ask mr. andrews and would like to know whether any of the people who served honorably and were killed in action were given the courtesy of a rose garden ceremony at the white house. i think the answer to that is probably no. the bottom line here is either what the president did benefited the security of the united states or it did not. i believe it did not. and i think that this was something that the american people disagree with and i see many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are looking to essentially run interference for the administration by blaming previous presidents. that doesn't cut it. let's deal with this issue as its own. i yield back. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. connelly for one minute. >> thank you, mr. chairman, mr. andrews mind deepest sympathy to you and your family. that may be your wife behind you? there aren't any words to express the terrible sense of loss you must experience, and i've had friends and had similar losses and i -- my

mr. bergdahl did become emotional. he was -- it was a very roller coaster ride for them, as you can imagine. that will continue. i'm going to get to general scales in a moment, but let me continue with the recap. there's a point where there was laughter. they're referring to some of the people who helped out as biker dudes and dudettes. before the father took the podium, i wanted to point out some of the remarks from the mother, jani bergdahl. she was there, speaking like a mother, coming out of the gate with tears, telling her son, i love you, bowe, i'm so very proud of you. she said she wants to give him a bear hug, never wanting to let you go. she's saying he came from a strong tribe and he's even stronger now. again, as you can imagine, this family has gone through a major ordeal, and there's so much more to come. that's where i want to bring in major general bob scales, fox news military analyst right now. thank as lot for being here with me. i want to talk about that, want to talk about the future. i want to talk

mr. secretary, on june 1, you were on "meet the press" and you expressed hope that the release of sergeant bergdahl would lead to direct u.s. talks with the taliban. mr. secretary, the taliban have stated there will be no peace with afghan government with the united states or any foreign presence as long as troops remain in afghanistan and prisons are contained at guantanamo bay. they have repeated these statements time and time again and have proven they do not desire peace with the united states or its allies. with this known, why did you at that point on "meet the press" express hope, and we can all have hope, that there would -- the release of the sergeant would lead to some type of direct negotiations with the united states? and do you today feel that that is still a real possibility? maybe there's something you want to say in the classified setting that you can't say here today, but this, to me, your statement was received by many of the people that i represent in the third district of north carolina that maybe there was in this negotiation about the sergeant, that maybe there was some signal

mr. secretary, on june 1, you were on "meet the press" and you expressed hope that the release of sergeant bergdahl would lead to direct u.s. talks with the taliban. mr. secretary, the taliban have stated there will be no peace with afghan government with the united states or any foreign presence as long as troops remain in afghanistan and prisons are contained at guantanamo bay. they have repeated these statements time and time again and have proven they do not desire peace with the united states or its allies. with this known, why did you at that point on "meet the press" express hope, and we can all have hope, that there would -- the release of the sergeant would lead to some type of direct negotiations with the united states? and do you today feel that that is still a real possibility? maybe there's something you want to say in the classified setting that you can't say here today, but this, to me, your statement was received by many of the people that i represent in the third district of north carolina that maybe there was in this negotiation about the sergeant, that maybe there was some signal

"while the bergdahls are overjoyed that their son has returned to the united states, mr. and mrs. nd to make any travel plans public. they ask for continued privacy as they concentrate on their son's reintegration. martin savidge live outside of the army hospital in san antonio. is it a surprise that the bergdahls aren't there? >> reporter: i think it is. i'll have to preface it by saying i have two sources that tell me that they're not on base and they're not in san antonio. i have been told in the two weeks i was here in the buildup to this that the family would arrive, would arrive early and that might have been the first tip that bergdahl himself was on his way. so something has changed. the question is why. could be medical staff. could be bergdahl himself saying i'm not ready. it could be the family could be here at a moment's notice when the time is right. remember, they've had threats that have been made against them themselves. right now when it comes to bergdahl's treatment, the army says they're going by the book. after five years in taliban captivity, army sergeant bowe

mr. bergdahl's capture. i'm happy about that. regrettably at the briefing on monday that issue did come up. there simply is no proof, no evidence. i think the way mr. bergdahl has been slandered has been scandalous. and i hope we'll take a step back and do what admiral winifeld said, we'll get him home and get him healthy, and due process will be exercised. what should be discussed today are the circumstances of this deal. and i think the chairman raised a number of appropriate questions. and i have enormous sympathy for the president and for you, mr. secretary. it's a very difficult decision that had to be made, whether or not this was an exchange in the best interests of the united states. ultimately i will tell you, i think it was. we do our level best to bring our service men and women home if we possibly can. not under any circumstances. the issue was raised, would we have traded khalid shaikh mohammed for him? absolutely not. totally different situation. when you're talking about these five members of the taliban, it is a d

mr. bergdahl after having been refused service by the u.s. coast guard.-oil prices spiking as the unrest in iraq rises. moody's chief economist on the cost to every day americans. a few thoughts on the islamic state of iraq and the push t take baghdad. the pictures of the i -- isil convoys, personnel carriers streaming across the desert and into the cities of iraq with black al qaeda flags flying above those vehicles bringing back memories of 23 years ago. it defeating the iraqis and choosing not to march on baghdad i remember my crew and by standing in the midst of hundreds of burning oil wells that had been set ablaze by a vanquished saddam hussein thinking that he should take all of that iraq because of my blood lust in the midst of such devastation because black smoke simply choked out the sun. the acid taste of sulfur and carbon and the deafening roar made us all believe saddam had succeeded in ending the world, at least part of it. twelve years later the american and coalition troops would take baghdad, and then we turned it over to the iraqis. and

mr. secretary, on june 1, you were on "meet the press" and you expressed hope that the release of sergeant bergdahl would lead to direct u.s. talks with the taliban. mr. secretary, the taliban have stated there will be no peace with afghan government with the united states or any foreign presence as long as troops remain in afghanistan and prisons are contained at guantanamo bay. they have repeated these statements time and time again and have proven they do not desire peace with the united states or its allies. with this known, why did you at that point on "meet the press" express hope, and we can all have hope, that there would -- the release of the sergeant would lead to some type of direct negotiations with the united states? and do you today feel that that is still a real possibility? maybe there's something you want to say in the classified setting that you can't say here today, but this, to me, your statement was received by many of the people that i represent in the third district of north carolina that maybe there was in this negotiation about the sergeant, that maybe there was some signal

mr. secretary on june 1st, you were on "meet the press" and you expressed hope that the release of sergeant bergdahl would lead to direct u.s. talk thes with the taliban. mr. sek ta, tcretasecretary, th said that there is not going to be any peace in afghanistan as long as there are prisoners in guantanamo bay, and they have repeated the statements time and time again and they have proven that they do not desire peace with the united states or our allies. with this known, why did you at that point on "meet the press" express hope, and we can all have hope, that with the release of the sergeant would lead to the some direct negotiation s with the united states, and do you today feel that that is still a real possibility. maybe it is something that you want to say in the classified setting that you can't say here today, but this is to me, your statement was received by many of the people that i represent in the 3rd district of north carolina that maybe there was in this negotiation about the sergeant that maybe there was some signals sent to you, sir, or to the administration that there might be a opp

mr. bergdahl's capture. i'm happy about that. i regrettably at the briefing we had on monday that issue did come up. there simply is no proof, no evidence, i think the way mr. bergdahl has been slaernded has been scandalous. you know, and i hope we'll take a step back and do what admiral winifield said we'll get him home, get him healthy and figure out what happened and due process will be exercised. that should not be discussed today. what should be discussed are the circumstances of this deal. and i think the chairman raised a number of appropriate questions, and i have enormous sympathy for the president and for you, mr. secretary, over a very difficult decision that had to be made here in terms of figuring out whether or not this was an exchange that was in the best interests of the united states. ultimately, i will tell you, i think it was. we do our level best to bring our service men and women home if we possibly can. not under any circumstances. the issue was raised, you know, would we have traded khalid shaikh mohammed f

mr. bergdahl, the men who risked their lives fighting for this country? the question is -- are you going to believe a president and an administration who tells you that mr. bergdahl served with honor and distinction, or are you going to believe the men who served with him who say that he walked away, who say that he lost interest in the war, did not believe in the war, and actively sought to contact our enemies? that is the question -- who do you believe? it is not about george w. bush, dick cheney, iraq. it is not about anything that has happened in the past. we are in the here and now. we are talking about this president and why do you believe him. is it because of your partisan loyalty or your racial loyalty or because you just hate bush so badly that anything obama does is right? it is a question of who do you believe. host: all right, and two other headlines to point out to you this morning, that shooting at seattle university, seattle pacific university, leaving one dead and three others injured after a gunman opened fired on the university campus.

mr. bergdahl? >> reporter: more of his recovery. a u.s. cial says medical personnel in germany determined that army sergeant bowe bergdahl was ready to take the next step in his reintegration process and so he's back on soil at brook army medical center in san antonio, texas. he is not expected to make any kind of public statement today and possibly not for the remainder of his treatment there. we expect bowe bergdahl will be reunited with his family in san antonio for the first time since he was captured by the taliban in june 2009. the obama administration swapped bergdahl for five taliban prisoners from gitmo on may 31 and bergdahl has been recuperating since june 1. bergdahl's back pay as a soldier on hold until the army determines why and how he was captured by the taliban. back to you all in new york. >> thank you very much. now he's back, he's going to get better and if there is music to be faced, he'll face the music. >> details are surfacing about why bergdahl did leave his platoon. we see this letter he allegedly sent to his paren

mr. bergdahl. they were able to read from his diary all that he wrote down about the military, about america, about his intentions, and wanting to leave, and then he did just that. 2h(t&háhp &hc% promote him to the level of sergeant while he was gone and while he willfully put the lives of other officers in danger by wandering off because he was politically opposed and his idealology was shaken by his experience over there. it's disgraceful. i'm looking for the administration to do the right thing and justice for the soldiers that died. >> instead of saying his fellow soldiers were lying, why don't they tell us what they do know, the obama administration? >> i think eventually you are going to have to find out. i don't think there's any rush to do it. i think the key thing here is we got that young man back and they are trying to get him in good health before they bring him home. i think it's an important point to understand that you have to understand that his conduct is not the basis on which you

mr. bergdahl into their service. i think that's where the issue begins. until we resolve that, i would say the writing is a suggestion that at least some of that was valid. >> i feel we are giving the authorities too much credit. when we start thinking this is part of a scheme, if we can see through the crystal ball we would see a guy going -- is that a booger or ingrown hair? >> when they talk about why they brought him into the service, that jumps everything -- >> and the military love their brothers, and none of his brothers are running to him. that should tell you what you need to know about bergdahl. >>> coming up, a cop in a bathroom. it is a story, not the start of a bad joke. female announcer: get on board for better sleep. it's sleep train's interest free for 3 event. get three years interest-free financing on beautyrest black, stearns & foster, serta icomfort; even tempur-pedic. plus, get free delivery, and sleep train's 100-day low price guarantee. you'll never find an interest rate lower than sleep train's interest free for 3 event, on now. ♪

mr. bergdahl who say he left of his own accord. is that the same as desertion?no, it doesn't mean the same as desertion. he may have left of his own accord. that will be proven in the final investigation because what we have right now is an effort that went underway when he left back in 2009. now we'll have a chance to interview sergeant bergdahl to determine from him what was your intent, what was your perspective, what were you thinking at the time, and that the that will enable us to conclude that investigation that really needs his perspective as well. >> woodruff: as we said in that report, we said the pentagon concluded in 2010, the year after he left, that he did walk away. so what more information will they need? if he did make this decision on his own, what will be a mitigating circumstance that would explain it? >> well, you will want to know from him what was your motivation, what were the circumstances that led you to walk away, if that's, in fact, what occurred, and i don't think you can determine that without getting into his state of mind and the

bergdahl family. while the family is overjoyed that their son has returned to the united states, mr. and mrs. bergdahl will not make any travel plans public. with that we'll go to the next question. >> hi, this is a little bit of a repeat, and i wasn't sure who should address this, but can you specifically address his condition now physically and then also his condition mentally, and then i have one other question related to that. the--if you could talk a little bit about whether he has expre expressed--whether he plans or wants to return to duty. >> as far as his medical condition we received from the phase two integration team this morning. overall we're pleased with his physical state. he was able to ambulate and walk into the hospital, and seemed to do so in a functional manner. we allowed him to get settled in to the hospital, and in to his room, and his environment. we're going to be planning more comprehensive testing and consultation, stuff that was not done during phase two. >> regarding his mental state, from the psychological perspective, we look at normal people who are living in a

mr. bergdahl? would you agree that the ndaa does not provide for that circumstance? >> not by its expressed terms, yes, i agree. >> what would be the effect on the nation, on the institution of the presidency if the president were to comply with this undue restriction and seek 30 day approval from congress before dealing with an emergent situation? >> well, let me first point out that the executive has consistently adhered to these provisions in all previous transfers. i wouldn't want this transfer in connection with the bergdahl exchange to be interpreted as an exception to the statute whenever there are emergent situations. you can imagine any number of emergent situations. this was driven by the particular collection of circumstances involved here in which the concern was that if in the process of finalizing this deal and executing on the exchange there had to be a delay for formal notice that it would stand to scuttle the deal and quite possibly endanger the individual. >> thank you, sir. i yield back. >>> just for the record it probably doesn't matter whether we

mrs. bergdahl, father and mother of a alleged deserter and giving them more attention than he's given to any military family, he should have had the families of the six soldier who's died searching for, and trying to free bowe bergdahl. our president disdanes our troops and then does this. what is the price of getting private bergdahl back? releasing five of the most dangerous terrorists in the world. >> the president, you know to say he disdains the troops is so controversial. but what he did here is also very controversial. more with you in just a moment. thank you for being here. also, coming up on thursday i kelly file exclusive, six members of sargeant bow bowe bergdahl's team will be here, in new york to talk about what happened on that day in 2009. and answer the question. is he a deserter or a traitor, possibly? will anyone defend him? you'll see that only here. plus, the senate intelligence committee met for 24 hours after fox confirmed there is a classified file on sargeant bergdahl and some members have concerns he may not only have deserted, but may have been an active collaborat

mr. bergdahl in a addition, i son in germany being treated by the u.s.itary. >> yeah i'm proud of how much you wanted to help the afghan people and what you were willing to do to go to that length. i will say it again, i am so proud of how far you were willing to go to help the afghan people. and i think you have succeeded. >> so the story is very complicated. a number of reports today afghanistan. there is reportedly correspondents, saying how dissolutioned he was with the afghan war blaming america for much of the carnage over there again colonel hunt has the inside story coming up. talking points believes there are valid points on both sides of the growing controversy. there is no question that president obama's actions will make things more dangerous for americans abroad, especially in the middle east and africa. but what do you do when you can save an american soldier being held in captivity for five years? do you walk away? possibly consigning the soldier to his death? i believe the administration, when it says had it to act quickly. a 30 day waiti

bergdahl family. an absolute insult. if ted cruz were in charge, if john mccain were in charge or if congress in next year's talk show host of the year, mr. rogers, if he were in charge, bergdahl would still be in captivity. bergdahl would not be released if those three guys had anything to do with it. but they're really happy, and they want to go celebrate with the family. although if they were in charge by the way they talk, we could easily come to the conclusion that, no, they wouldn't have done this deal. either this is a good deal or it's a bad deal. their hypocrisy on this issue is absolutely stunning. throughout the history of war, deals like this have been made shall as hagel explained. a soldier's life has been saved. remember, we support the troops. republicans can't stand it because it makes president obama look good. this is a new level, a new level of dirt that's being thrown out by the republican party and these folks on the sunday shows. they have no boundaries, they have no decency and they don't have the guts to say if that was my kid in captivity, i wouldn't have done the deal. i didn't hear that. bringing down obama is

mr. bergdahl, why not ten? why not 20? what else are we saying? the backlash over the bergdahl prisoner swap has been partisan. partisan. can it did you know a ten-second test partisan. can it could help your business avoid hours of delay caused by slow internet from the phone company? that's enough time to record a memo. idea for sales giveaway. return a call. sign a contract. pick a tie. take a break with mr. duck. practice up for the business trip. fly to florida. win an award. close a deal. hire an intern. and still have time to spare. check your speed. see how fast your internet can be. switch now and add voice and tv for $34.90. comcast business. built for business. autoi'm never surprise bid controversies whipped up in washington. that's par for the course. >> president obama brushing off criticism of the bergdahl prisoner swap as washington politics as usual, and we're back now with the pabl. george, one of the problems with this controversy is that it's just the latest in a series of issues for this president starting with the obama care

mr. bergdahl now? >> sure, absolutely.o -- some of it is probably propaganda but you can almost bet that's going to happen. the way it works over there, if they see something go down that we, we lease five of their guys for the one of ours. there is multiple groups out there and they are not stupid. they will know and go after more people and demand more for their release is the way it works. >> that may explain why so many in the military said they are against this. 68% of aet vines think this was a bad deal. what do you think? >> i agree with that. from a military perspective, it was a bad deal. they weren't the bottom of the barrel, the iud placers. they were high-value targets. we spent a lot of time and intel going after these guys to get them at great cost to us and the way the organization works, it's not built from the bottom up, it's built from the top up. the property began to machine to the tactics and they recruit and build on top of that, and the fact that they, i mean, very well could say americans had me for

mr. bergdahl refer to, this p.o.w. mm.i.a. oup, you heard them clapping for them as the bergdahls came in and out. dana, what i think i was struck by and i think for people who -- it's fascinating, i would travel the country and talk about having covered the story of bowe bergdahl. it's been fascinating over the last five years how few people actually knew that there was a soldier missing in afghanistan and in large part because the bergdahls shunned most interviews. they only did a handful of interviews over the last five years. so this is a story that kind of flew below the radar in many ways for five years, as crazy as that might seem to people. but i think when you heard bob bergdahl speaking today, i think you got a glimpse into his personality, the methodical nature by which he kind of studied the situation and learned more about it when you heard him talking about his network of language sources and intelligent sources. these were efforts that he did. he released a youtube video in hopes that that would spark a communica